appendix 8 - apa group management plan... · sensitive receptor a location in the vicinity of the...

Roma to Brisbane Pipeline – Dalby Compressor Station Upgrade Environmental Management Plan

PR104962-1 Rev 0; June 2011

Appendix 8

Noise Assessment

Roma to Brisbane Pipeline – Dalby Compressor Station Upgrade Environmental Management Plan

PR104962-1 Rev 0; June 2011

APA DALBY COMPRESSOR STATION

Proposed Extension

Environmental Noise Assessment

Prepared For

RPS 743 Ann Street, Fortitude Valley, Brisbane, QLD 4006.

S3551C2

January 2011

Sonus Pty Ltd 17 Ruthven Avenue

ADELAIDE SA 5000 Phone: (08) 8231 2100

Facsimile: (08) 8231 2122 www.sonus.com.au

ABN: 67 882 843 130

APA Dalby Compressor Station Environmental Noise Assessment January 2011 S3551C2 PAGE 2

GLOSSARY

Background noise level Noise level in the absence of intermittent noise sources

Background creep The gradual increase in background noise levels in an area as a result

of successive developments generating constant noise levels at a

particular location.

CONCAWE The oil companies’ international study group for conservation of clean

air and water – Europe

“The propagation of noise from petrochemical complexes to

neighbouring communities”

dB(A) A weighted noise level measured in decibels. A weighting is a

frequency adjustment representing the response of the human ear

Equivalent noise level Energy averaged noise level

LA10 A weighted noise level exceeded 10% of the time, representing the

typical upper noise level

LA90 A weighted noise level exceeded 90% of the time, representing the

background noise level

LAeq A weighted equivalent noise level measured in decibels

LAeq, 1 hour A weighted equivalent noise level measured in decibels over a period

of 1 hour

LAeq, adj, 1 hour A weighted equivalent noise level measured in decibels over a period

of 1 hour and adjusted for tonality

LpA,LF Indoor low frequency A weighted noise level

RBL Rating Background Level

Sensitive receptor A location in the vicinity of the proposed development, where noise

may affect the amenity of the land use. For the proposed

development, sensitive receptors are generally dwellings.

Sound power level A measure of the sound energy emitted from a source of noise.

WHO World Health Organisation

Worst Case Conditions resulting in the highest noise level at or inside dwellings.

Worst case meteorological conditions can be characterised as no

cloud at night with wind from the project site to dwellings.

Worst case building construction refers to a façade constructed from

light weight materials providing the lowest noise reduction across it.


TABLE OF CONTENTS

GLOSSARY ............................................................................................................................................ 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS ......................................................................................................................... 3

1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................. 4

2 DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING ENVIRONMENT ............................................................................ 5

3 METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS AND ATMOSPHERIC EFFECTS ........................................ 7

4 CRITERIA ..................................................................................................................................... 10

4.1 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (NOISE) POLICY 2008 ............................................................... 10 4.2 PLANNING FOR NOISE CONTROL GUIDELINE ............................................................................. 12 4.3 WORLD HEALTH ORGANISATION GUIDELINES ............................................................................ 13 4.4 LOW FREQUENCY NOISE DRAFT GUIDELINE .............................................................................. 13 4.5 SUMMARY OF CRITERIA ........................................................................................................... 14

5 ASSESSMENT.............................................................................................................................. 16

5.1 NOISE SOURCES ..................................................................................................................... 16 5.2 ADDITIONAL ACOUSTIC ATTENUATION ....................................................................................... 16 5.3 PREDICTED NOISE ................................................................................................................... 18

6 CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................................. 20

REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................................... 22

APPENDIX A: SENSITIVE RECEPTORS IN THE VICINITY OF THE FACILITY ............................... 23

APPENDIX B: NOISE CONTOUR ....................................................................................................... 24


1 INTRODUCTION

The APA Dalby Compressor Station is located near the township of Dalby. The APA Group

is proposing to extend the capacity of the facility involving the installation of two new

compression units.

Sonus has been engaged to make an assessment of the environmental noise from the

proposed extension to the Dalby Compressor Station. The assessment has consisted of:

a survey of the existing acoustic environment and equipment on site;

measurements of the noise from the existing compressor;

a prediction of the noise from the new compressors on site at the closest sensitive

receptors;

a comparison of the predicted levels with the relevant environmental noise criteria, and;

recommendations for acoustic treatment measures.

The new gas compression units will comprise a compressor and the associated drive

equipment. The gas compression units have the potential to operate continuously.


2 DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING ENVIRONMENT

The Dalby Compressor Station is located near the township of Dalby. At sensitive receptors,

the acoustic environment is characterised by local and distant road traffic and natural noise

sources such as wind in trees and birds. This results in a low noise environment, typical of a

rural setting, except where a receptor is located in close proximity to the compressor station

or roads. Appendix A provides the coordinates and approximate distances of the sensitive

receptors considered in this assessment.

The topography between the site and the sensitive receptors is relatively flat and it is

expected that the topography will have negligible influence on the noise predicted at the

closest sensitive receptors.

Background noise levels (LA90) were measured at a location which was selected to be

indicative of nearby residences. The location was not influenced by any existing fixed noise

sources and was an equivalent distance to roads as most residences. The measurements

were made between the 18th and the 27th of October, 2010, in accordance with the

Queensland Department of Environment and Resource Management’s (DERM) “Noise

Measurement Manual” (the DERM Noise Measurement Manual).

Using the measurement data obtained, the Rating Background Levels (RBL) were calculated

in accordance with the “Planning for Noise Control” Guideline released by DERM. The

calculated RBLs are summarised in Table 2.1.

Table 2.1: Calculated Rated Background Levels.

RBL dB(A)

Day Evening Night

29 32 26


The RBL is determined from the lower tenth percentile of the LA90 noise level in the

environment and effectively represents the “lulls”. That is, the RBL is representative of the

quietest periods at the monitoring location. The calculated RBLs are considered to be

representative of all sensitive receptors which are located in an environment dominated by

distant traffic noise and natural noise sources such as wind in trees and birds.

Under certain conditions, an existing compressor unit located at the station can contribute to

the noise level at the sensitive receptors. Noise from the existing compressor was measured

in the vicinity of the site on the 22nd of October, 2010. These measurements were used to

estimate noise from the existing compressor at the sensitive receptors

As the RBL represents the lowest 10% of the LA90 noise level, existing noise sources will not

contribute to the RBL unless noise levels are significant during upwind conditions. To

determine the influence of the existing compressor on the RBL at each sensitive receptor,

predictions have been conducted under mild upwind conditions. Based on the predictions,

noise from the existing compressor only significantly influences the RBL at residence R1.


3 METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS AND ATMOSPHERIC EFFECTS

The CONCAWE noise propagation model is used around the world and is widely accepted

as an appropriate model for predicting noise over significant distances.

The CONCAWE system divides the range of possible meteorological conditions into six

separate “weather categories”, from Category 1 to Category 6. Weather Category 1 provides

“best-case” (i.e. lowest noise level) weather conditions for the propagation of noise, whilst

weather Category 6 provides “worst-case” (i.e. highest noise level) conditions, when

considering wind speed, wind direction, time of day, and level of cloud cover. Weather

Category 4 provides “neutral” weather conditions for noise propagation.

For the purposes of comparison, Categories 1, 2 and 3 weather conditions are generally

characterised by wind blowing from the receptor to the noise source during the daytime with

little or no cloud cover. Category 4 conditions can be characterised by no wind and an

overcast day, whilst no wind and a clear night sky represent Category 5 conditions.

Category 6 conditions can be characterised by a clear night sky and wind blowing from the

noise source to the receptor.

In the particular circumstances of this development, it is noted that the noise levels

experienced at sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the facility will be significantly affected by

the weather category. For example, higher noise levels would be expected at sensitive

receptors with wind blowing from the site to the sensitive receptor (i.e. Category 5 or 6

conditions) than with wind blowing from the sensitive receptor to the site (i.e. Category 1, 2,

or 3 conditions).

Twelve months of historical meteorological data for Dalby were processed to determine the

likelihood of each meteorological category. The times during which the wind speed is greater

than 5m/s have been listed separately and excluded from each category, as it is anticipated

that ambient noise levels (from wind in trees) would mask the noise from the site at these

times.


Tables 3.1 to 3.4 summarise the percentage of time in each meteorological category for the

closest sensitive receptor located to the north of the site (most critical receptor), and for

sensitive locations to the northeast, east and south of the site.

Table 3.1: Distribution of meteorological categories for sensitive receptor located to the north of the site.

Meteorological Category

Total Percentage of Time in Each Category

Percentage of Time in Each Category during Night-time Only

Wind Speed > 5m/s 16% 5%

Category 1 1% 0%

Category 2 10% 7%

Category 3 17% 16%

Category 4 24% 29%

Category 5 23% 28%

Category 6 9% 15%

Table 3.2: Distribution of meteorological categories for sensitive receptor located to the northeast of the site.





Category 1 2% 0%

Category 2 12% 8%

Category 3 26% 29%

Category 4 24% 35%

Category 5 12% 12%

Category 6 8% 11%

Table 3.3: Distribution of meteorological categories for sensitive receptor located to the east of the site.





Category 1 2% 0%

Category 2 13% 6%

Category 3 22% 28%

Category 4 25% 35%

Category 5 15% 15%

Category 6 8% 11%


Table 3.4: Distribution of meteorological categories for sensitive receptor located to the south of the site.





Category 1 1% 0%

Category 2 5% 1%

Category 3 18% 18%

Category 4 23% 27%

Category 5 22% 24%

Category 6 15% 25%

For compliance testing, the DERM Noise Measurement Manual requires that the noise

measurement be conducted during fine weather conditions with calm to light winds.

Measurement during conditions conducive to sound propagation should only be conducted if

the conditions are a true representation of the normal situation in the area. When conducting

a noise prediction, it is therefore considered appropriate that the prediction is also made for

fine weather conditions, unless conditions conducive to sound propagation are

representative of the normal conditions in the area.

To objectively determine whether the meteorological conditions conducive to sound

propagation are a representation of the normal conditions of an area, reference is made to

the Planning for Noise Control Guideline.

The Planning for Noise Control Guideline states that the meteorological conditions

conducive to sound propagation, such as temperature inversions (Categories 5 and 6) and

downwind conditions will be a significant feature of the area if they occur for 30% of the time.

Therefore based on Table 3.1, Categories 5 and 6 weather conditions are considered to be a

feature of the area at the most critical receptor.

Consequently, it is proposed that the assessment of noise at all sensitive receptors in the

vicinity of the facility be made under worst-case (CONCAWE Category 6) meteorological

conditions.


4 CRITERIA

The Environmental Protection (Noise) Policy 2008 has been used as the primary method of

objectively assessing the noise from the proposal. However, reference is also made to the

World Health Organisation (WHO) Guidelines, the DERM “Planning for Noise Control”

Guideline and the DERM “Assessment of Low Frequency Noise” Draft Guideline.

4.1 Environmental Protection (Noise) Policy 2008

The Environmental Protection (Noise) Policy 2008 (the Policy) provides the management

intent to control background noise creep as well as achieve acoustic quality objectives for

sensitive receptors.

A traditional approach to environmental noise has been to measure existing background

noise levels1 prior to a development and to set environmental noise criteria at a certain level

above the existing background noise level. Where this methodology is used, background

noise levels are measured over a period of time to incorporate a range of meteorological

conditions. The background noise level used is at the lower end of the range of measured

levels.

One of the concerns about this methodology is that each development may increase the

background noise level allowing more relaxed criteria for future developments. This

theoretical phenomenon of the degradation of the acoustic environment with successive

developments is known as background creep. For this development to contribute to

background creep, successive developments would need to rely on background noise levels,

which have been elevated by previous projects, to set less stringent criteria.

1 For the purposes of this report the background noise level is represented by the RBL.


To control background creep, the Policy includes:

To the extent that it is reasonable to do so, noise from an activity must not be –

(a) For noise that is continuous noise measured by LA90,T - more than nil

dB(A) greater than the existing acoustic environment measured by LA90,T;

or

(b) For noise that varies over time measured by LAeq,adj,T - more than 5 dB(A)

greater than the existing acoustic environment measured by LA90T.

As the noise from the proposal is expected to be continuous, it is part (a) that applies. Based

on the measured background noise levels, the criteria associated with controlling

background creep are shown in Table 4.1.

Table 4.1: Criteria to control background creep.

LA90,T dB(A)

Day Evening Night

29 32 26

Since the development of the WHO Guidelines, it has become more common for regulatory

authorities to base environmental noise criteria on avoiding health and wellbeing impacts

rather than comparison with background noise levels. The Policy includes acoustic quality

objectives based on the WHO Guidelines. These are described in Table 4.2.

Table 4.2: The Environmental Protection (Noise) Policy acoustic quality objectives.

Sensitive Receptor

Time of Day

Acoustic Quality Objectives (dB(A))* Environmental Value

LAeq,adj,1hr LA10,adj,1hr LA1,adj,1hr

dwelling (for outdoors)

daytime¹ and evening²

50 55 65 health and wellbeing

dwelling (for indoors

4)

daytime and evening

35 40 45 health and wellbeing

night-time³ 30 35 40 health and wellbeing in relation to the ability to sleep

Note: * Measured at the sensitive receptor. ¹ Daytime is defined by the Policy as “the period after 7am on a day to 6pm on the day”.

² Evening is defined by the Policy as “the period after 6pm on a day to 10pm on the day”. ³ Night-time is defined by the Policy as “the period after 10pm on a day to 7am on the next day”. 4 In accordance with the WHO Guidelines, indoor noise levels can be converted to outdoor levels by the addition of 15 dB(A) assuming windows being partially open for ventilation.


The noise from the existing compressor is predicted to be 41 dB(A) at residence R1 under

worst case conditions. As the noise from the existing compressor dominates the noise level

at residence R1, it is not relevant to assess noise from the proposed compressors against

the RBLs at a location not influenced by the existing compressor. In accordance with the

intent of the Policy, the total noise from the site (including the existing and proposed

compressors) should achieve a level of 41 dB(A) in order to prevent background noise

creep.

4.2 Planning for Noise Control Guideline

At locations not influenced by industrial noise sources, the DERM Guideline specifies a

criterion based on the RBL, plus an adjustment of 3 dB(A) for the conversion to an

equivalent (LAeq) noise level. Therefore, based on the measured RBLs, the most stringent

(night time) criterion is 29 dB(LAeq) for residences R2-R9.

At locations where industrial noise sources are present, the DERM Guideline protects

against background noise creep by setting a criterion that results in no increase in the local

noise level. In situations where there is no opportunity to reduce existing noise levels, noise

from the proposed compressors should be limited to 10 dB(A) below any existing noise

source. However, it is expected that acoustic treatment incorporated in the expansion will

also reduce the noise from the existing compressor at residence R1. Under these

circumstances it is proposed that the total noise (existing and proposed compressors) from

the compressor station is to achieve the existing level of 41 dB(A), thereby achieving the

intent of the DERM Guideline.


4.3 World Health Organisation Guidelines

The WHO has developed guidelines2 for community noise in specific environments. With

respect to annoyance, the guidelines state:

“To protect the majority of people from being seriously annoyed during the daytime, the

sound pressure level on balconies, terraces and outdoor living areas should not exceed

55 dB LAeq for a steady continuous noise. To protect the majority of people from being

moderately annoyed during the daytime, the outdoor sound pressure level should not

exceed 50 dB(A) LAeq.”

To avoid sleep disturbance, the WHO suggests that the equivalent noise level (LAeq) should

be limited to 30 dB(A) inside a bedroom at night. Based on the windows being partially open,

the WHO suggests that to achieve the internal level described above, the equivalent noise

level outside a bedroom window should be limited to 45 dB(A).

Sonus has conducted tests of the noise reduction achieved across the facade of a number of

dwellings. These tests include a range of facade constructions from light weight

transportable homes to masonry homes. The results of the testing indicate that with windows

partially open for ventilation, the noise transfer is typically around 15 dB(A). The tests

confirms that the WHO noise reduction of 15 dB(A) across a facade is appropriate.

4.4 Low Frequency Noise Draft Guideline

The noise from the proposed new equipment is not dominated by low frequency noise (refer

Table 5.1) but the propagation of sound over large distances attenuates the high and mid

frequencies, leaving a greater low frequency component and therefore as a conservative

approach, assessment against the suggestions of the Low Frequency Noise Draft Guidelines

has been included.

2 Berglund, Lindvall and Schwela, 1999, “Guidelines for Community Noise”


The draft guideline separates the assessment of low frequency noise based on the

frequency content of the noise and whether the noise is tonal or broad band. Based on

measurements of similar equipment at other sites, the noise experienced at sensitive

receptors will not include a significant component of infrasound (less than 20Hz) and will not

be tonal.

For non-tonal, low frequency noise in the range of 20Hz to 200Hz, the draft guideline

suggests that the noise is considered to be acceptable if the contribution of low frequency

noise within a sensitive receptor (LpA,LF) does not exceed 20 dB(A) during the evening or

night and 25 dB(A) during the day.

The low frequency noise transfer from outside to inside sensitive receptors varies

significantly based on the construction of the dwelling. Sonus has recently conducted tests of

the noise reduction achieved across the facade of a number of dwellings. The results from

these tests indicate that the low frequency noise reduction, with windows partially open,

ranges from 10 dB(A) for a light weight transportable home to 20 dB(A) for a well

constructed masonry home. This assessment has been based on a noise reduction of

10 dB(A), which represents a worst-case (conservative) assessment.

4.5 Summary of Criteria

The Policy, the DERM Guidelines and the recommendations of the WHO Guidelines have

been considered in determining appropriate criteria for the proposed extension.

It is common practice for noise from industrial sources to be predicted as an equivalent level

(LAeq), therefore the criteria provided in Table 4.1 require adjusting from the provided LA90

levels. A regularly accepted adjustment is an addition of 3 dB(A) for the conversion of an

LA90 to an LAeq noise level, an example of which is contained within the Planning for Noise

Control Guideline.


With consideration to the existing ambient noise environment and the existing compressor

located on site, it is proposed that that the following criteria are established to ensure

compliance at each noise sensitive location:

Residence R1: Noise from both the existing and proposed compressors to achieve

an outdoor level of 41 dB(A); and,

Residences R2-R9: Noise from the proposed compressors to achieve a level of

29 dB(A).

Where the above criteria are achieved, the intent of the Environmental Protection (Noise)

Policy 2008, the World Health Organisation (WHO) Guidelines and the DERM Planning for

Noise Control Guideline will also be achieved.


5 ASSESSMENT

5.1 Noise Sources

It is proposed that two Solar Centaur 50 compression units are to be installed at the Dalby

Compressor Station. Table 5.1 below contains sound power levels for each item of

equipment provided by the manufacturer of the compressors.

Table 5.1: Main noise sources and sound power levels

Noise Source

Maximum Sound Power Level (dB(A) re 1 pW) by Octave Band Frequency (Hz) Total

(dB(A)) 32 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000

Unsilenced Combustion Air Inlet

68 87 103 111 118 123 127 151 141 151

Unsilenced Combustion Exhaust

79 94 104 110 123 120 115 103 92 125

Unenclosed Package

74 87 100 109 115 113 112 111 110 120

5.2 Additional Acoustic Attenuation

Noise from the operation of the new gas compression units at the sensitive receptors in the

vicinity of the site has been predicted using the CONCAWE noise propagation model in the

SoundPlan noise modelling software. The CONCAWE propagation model takes into account

topography, ground absorption and meteorological conditions, and has been used and

accepted around the world as an appropriate sound propagation model. In the noise model,

flat ground was considered as the attenuation due to undulating ground surface is

considered negligible at the closest sensitive receptor.

Based on the predicted noise from the proposed compressors it is required that additional

acoustic attenuation be applied to the standard measures included in Table 5.1. The

additional acoustic treatment is required to ensure compliance with the relevant criteria and

is summarised below:


Replace the standard inlet silencer with a silencer that provides an equivalent

acoustic performance to that provided in Table 5.2;

Replace the standard exhaust silencer with a silencer that provides an equivalent

acoustic performance to that provided in Table 5.2. A suitable example is a

“Colpro 750 series” silencer;

Enclose the package with the standard enclosure specified by the manufacturer,

such that the sound power levels provided in Table 5.2 are not exceeded;

Build an acoustic barrier from compressed fibre cement with a minimum thickness of

18mm, located no greater than 6m from the enclosed package. The barrier should

block line of sight between the enclosed package and the closest residence and be

at least 35m in length and a height of at least 1.5m above the height of the of the

enclosed package and air inlet. The barrier should be sealed airtight from the ground

to the full height of the barrier; and,

Acoustic insulation should be installed on the acoustic barrier described above. The

insulation should be 50mm thick with a minimum density of 32 kg/m3. This insulation

may be protected with a perforated material (such as sheet steel or fibre cement

sheeting) with an open area of at least 15%, a diagram of the proposed construction

is provided below.

Weatherproof capping

50mm thick acoustic insulation with a minimum density of 32 kg/m3

Perforated material (e.g. sheet steel, fibre cement sheet) with an open area > 15% spaced from the insulation to provide weatherproofing

Acoustic Barrier

Compressor Station Side


Table 5.2: Additional Acoustic Treatment.

Frequency (Hz) 31.5 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 Total

Inlet Silencer (Insertion Loss) (dB)

1 4 15 20 32 37 46 47 31 -

Exhaust Silencer (Insertion Loss) (dB)

- 21 32 39 51 48 46 39 31 -

Enclosed Package (SWL (dB(A))

65 79 87 95 97 96 93 89 82 102

Alternatively, the criteria could be achieved without the use of a barrier adjacent to the new

compressors by installing all three of the following additional measures:

An acoustic enclosure around the proposed compressors that performs significantly

better than the manufacturer’s standard enclosure;

An air inlet attenuator that performs significantly better than the manufacturer’s

standard attenuator;

Additional attenuation to the existing compressor, which may take the form of a small

barrier to block line of sight to the cooling fan.

5.3 Predicted Noise

The noise levels outside of dwellings R2-R9 have been predicted under worst case

meteorological conditions, from the operation of the new compressor units and the acoustic

treatment incorporating the noise barrier. The noise level at each sensitive receptor is

summarised in Table 5.3 and a noise contour is provided in Appendix B, based on the sound

power levels of the equipment listed in Table 5.1 and the additional acoustic attenuation

provided above.


Table 5.3: Predicted Noise Level Outside the Dwellings.

Sensitive Receptor Predicted Noise Level (dB(A))

R2 28

R3 26

R4 23

R5 21

R6 18

R7 15

R8 16

R9 18

In addition, the low frequency noise level inside dwellings R2-R9 is below 20 dB(A).

Therefore, it is predicted that the compressor station will comply with the low frequency

noise draft guideline at each of these dwellings.

The noise level at residence R1 has been predicted under worst case conditions, due to the

simultaneous operation of the existing and proposed compressors. The total predicted noise

level from the compressor station is 40 dB(A), less than the existing noise level at residence

R1.

It is predicted that the low frequency noise level inside residence R1 from the operation of

the compressor station following installation is no greater than the level prior to the

extension.


6 CONCLUSION

An assessment has been made of the noise from the proposed compressors at the APA

Dalby Compressor Station. The assessment considered noise from both the existing and

proposed compressors at the facility.

Based upon the Environmental Protection (Noise) Policy, appropriate conditions for noise

levels at sensitive receptors have been determined, taking into consideration the existing

acoustic environment. The proposed noise conditions for the operation of the facility are:

Residence R1: Noise from both the existing and proposed compressors to achieve

an outdoor level of 41 dB(A); and,

Residences R2-R9: Noise from the proposed compressors to achieve a level of

29 dB(A).

The noise at the sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the site from the operation of the

compressor station has been predicted. The predictions indicate that the proposed noise

conditions for the operation of the facility will be achieved at all sensitive receptors, with a

feasible level of acoustic treatment applied.

The acoustic treatment outlined in this report comprises:

Attenuators fitted to the air inlet and exhaust of the proposed compressors;

Enclosing the proposed compressors with a standard package specified by the

manufacturer; and

The construction of an acoustic barrier adjacent to the proposed compressors.


Alternatively, the criteria could be achieved without the use of a barrier adjacent to the new

compressors by installing all three of the following additional measures:

An acoustic enclosure around the proposed compressors that performs significantly

better than the manufacturer’s standard enclosure;

An air inlet attenuator that performs significantly better than the manufacturer’s

standard attenuator; and,

Additional attenuation to the existing compressor, which may take the form of a

reduced barrier to block line of sight to the cooling fan.

With the above acoustic treatment in place, the APA Dalby Compressor Station will satisfy

the intent of:

The Environmental Protection (Noise) Policy 2008;

The World Health Organisation (WHO) Guidelines;

The DERM “Planning for Noise Control” Guideline; and,

The DERM “Assessment of Low Frequency Noise” Draft Guideline.


REFERENCES

Berglund,B., Lindvall, T., and Schwela, D.H. 1999 . Guidelines for Community Noise. World Health Organisation, Geneva. DERM. 2004. Guideline – Planning for noise control. Department of Environment and Resource Management, Queensland Government, Brisbane, Queensland. DERM. 2002. Draft Guideline - Assessment of Low Frequency Noise. Department of Environment and Resource Management, Queensland Government, Brisbane, Queensland. Manning, C.J. 1981. The propagation of noise from petrochemical complexes to neighbouring communities. CONCAWE - The oil companies’ international study group for conservation of clean air and water – Europe. Queensland Government. 2009. Environmental Protection (Noise) Policy 2008. Reprint No.1. Queensland Government, Brisbane, Queensland. Queensland Government. 2000. Noise Measurement Manual. Third Edition. March. Environment Protection Authority, Queensland Government, Brisbane, Queensland.


APPENDIX A: SENSITIVE RECEPTORS IN THE VICINITY OF THE FACILITY

Table A1: Coordinates and Approximates Distances of the Sensitive Receptors from the Site.

Sensitive Receptor

(WGS 84) Approximate Distance from the Site (m)

Easting Northing

R1 322576 6990902 350

R2 322315 6989262 1300

R3 323822 6990572 1300

R4 324091 6990755 1600

R5 324416 6991004 1900

R6 324350 6991185 1900

R7 324021 6991620 1800

R8 323709 6991752 1700

R9 323541 6991546 1400

Loction 1

A.1


APPENDIX B: NOISE CONTOUR

R1

R4

R9

R3

R8

R2

R6

R5

R7

appendix 8 - apa group management plan... · sensitive receptor a location in the vicinity of the...

Documents